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 .
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of 35 U.S.C. 112(a):
(a) IN GENERAL.—The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor or joint inventor of carrying out the invention.
The following is a quotation of the first paragraph of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112:
The specification shall contain a written description of the invention, and of the manner and process of making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and use the same, and shall set forth the best mode contemplated by the inventor of carrying out his invention.
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 1-8 rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(a) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), first paragraph, as failing to comply with the enablement requirement. The claim(s) contains subject matter which was not described in the specification in such a way as to enable one skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly connected, to make and/or use the invention. Claim 1 recites that the component is “of a horological movement.” However, the specification does not enable one skilled in the art to use the invention as part of a horological movement. Though [0019] discloses that the component may be a rocker, lever, shaft, or any other elongate member, the specification overall does not disclose how such a component would combine with a horological movement. In particular, when the component has been extended and snap-fitted to prevent relative mobility, how does the component unlock so as to occupy the folded position again? The claims recite that a resilient return force will release the snap-fit (see claims 3-4), but what structure in the horological movement generates the return force that causes the resilient tab to release from the catch and how? As currently written, the specification may teach one of ordinary skill in the art to set up the component as a lever or rocker, but the specification does not teach one of ordinary skill in the art how to control the component’s extended and folded positions in a timepiece.
Claims 5, 6, and 8 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 5 recites “it” in line 2. Whether “it” refers to the resilient tab or the catch is ambiguous. For the purposes of examination, “it” has been read as -the resilient tab-.
Claim 6 recites the limitation "the axis of rotation of the arms" in the third-to-last line. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. It has been read as -an axis of rotation of the arms-.
Claim 8 recites “it” in line 2. What structure this pronoun refers to is ambiguous because “it” may refer to the proximal portion, the resilient tab, or the segment. For the purposes of examination, “it” has been changed to -the segment-.
Claim 8 lacks antecedent basis for “the centre” in the penultimate line. The limitation has been read as -a center-.
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.
Claim 1 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Seckler (CH 48871).
Regarding claim 1, Seckler teaches (Figs. 1-2) a component (c-d) of a horological movement (Fig. 1), comprising: two arms (c-d); a pivot link (n) connecting the two arms, the component (c-d) being able to occupy an extended position (Fig. 2) and a folded position (Fig. 1), in which folded position the arms form a smaller angle than when the component occupies the extended position (Figs. 1-2); and a coupling mechanism comprising snap fitting elements (pin g and recess fitting g) and configured to prevent any relative mobility between the two arms when the component occupies the extended position (Fig. 2).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2-8 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112 or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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: regarding claim 2, Seckler teaches the snap fitting elements being formed by a tab (left end of d) arranged on one of the arms (d) including a recess (Fig. 2—recess fitting g) in which a catch (g) is housed. The prior art does not show or suggest the catch being arranged on the other of the two arms and the tab being resilient, in combination with the other limitations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Rochat et al. (US 20080279052) teaches (Fig. 2) a component (26, 44) of a horological movement comprising two arms (26, 44) and a pivot link (48) connecting the two arms so that the component may occupy an extended position (Fig. 7) and a folded position (Fig. 3). See [0039]-[0041] and [0046]. However, Rochat does not teach the component comprising snap fitting elements configured to prevent any relative mobility between the two arms when the component occupies the extended position.
Middlestadt (US 20180320423) teaches (Figs. 1, 5) a component comprising two arms (22, 12) and a pivot link (16) connecting the arms so that the component may occupy an extended position (Fig. 1) and a folded position (Fig. 5), wherein the component further comprises snap fitting elements ([0007]) configured to prevent relative mobility between the two arms (definition of snap-fit). However, Middlestadt does not teach the component being used as part of a horological movement.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew Hwang whose telephone number is (571)272-1191. The examiner can normally be reached M-F from 9:30-5:30 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, 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.
/MATTHEW DANIEL HWANG/ Examiner, Art Unit 2831
/EDWIN A. LEON/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights