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 .
Response to Amendment
Regarding objections to the drawings:
The drawings were objected to due to multiple informalities. The Applicant provided replacement drawings received 7/20/2026 and amended the specification with respect to the drawings to correct the informalities, therefore the objections were withdrawn.
Regarding rejections of the claims under §103:
Claims 1-11 were rejected as being obvious over Tsunoda in view of Benner. Claim 12 was rejected as being obvious over Tsunoda in view of Benner and Hunter. The Applicant amended claim 1.
Response to Arguments
Applicant’s arguments, see pages 8-10, filed 7/20/2026, with respect to the rejection of claim 1 under 103 have been fully considered and are persuasive. Therefore, the rejection has been withdrawn. However, upon further consideration, a new ground of rejection is made in view of U.S. Patent No. 4,845,424 to Gamble.
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.
Claims 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent No. 5,275,141 to Tsunoda et al. (hereinafter Tsunoda; cited by Applicant on 2/17/2025) in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0181549 to Benner, JR (hereinafter Benner) and U.S. Patent No. 4,845,424 to Gamble.
Regarding claim 1, Tsunoda teaches a rotary reciprocating drive actuator (FIG. 4, 1), comprising:
a movable body (FIG. 4, 4) that includes a shaft part (FIG. 4, 7) and is capable of reciprocating rotation around the shaft part, wherein a magnet (FIG. 4, 8) is fixed on an outer periphery of the shaft part; and
a unit main body (FIG. 4, 3) that causes the reciprocating rotation of the movable body by interaction with the magnet, wherein
the unit main body includes
a core body (FIG. 2; 18a, 18b) that includes a pair of magnetic poles (FIG. 2; 19a, 19b) and a magnetic path part (FIG. 2; 20a, 20b), the pair of magnetic poles extending on one straight line on both sides of the magnet in a radial direction of the shaft part, the magnetic path part surrounding the pair of magnetic poles and the magnet and connecting the pair of magnetic poles to each other,
a pair of coil bodies (FIG. 2; 14a, 14b) that are respectively wound around the pair of magnetic poles and cause the interaction by energizing of the coil bodies, and
a biasing part (FIG. 2; 17a) disposed in a recess (FIG. 2, 16a) formed in the unit main body at a position between the magnetic poles in a circumferential direction of the shaft part, the biasing part biasing the movable body toward an initial position of the reciprocating rotation (Column 3 lines 50-66).
Tsunoda does not teach the biasing part being disposed in a recess formed in the magnetic path part, wherein the recess is formed in a portion of the magnetic path part that is different from the pair of magnetic poles, around which the pair of coil bodies are not wound, and that faces the magnet.
However, Benner teaches a biasing part (FIG. 9, 132) formed in a recess formed in a magnetic path part (FIG. 9, 102).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary reciprocating drive actuator of Tsunoda with the recess location of Benner to better direct the magnetic flux from the biasing part.
Tsunoda in view of Benner does not teach the recess being formed in a portion of the magnetic path part that is different from the pair of magnetic poles, around which the pair of coil bodies are not wound, and that faces the magnet.
However, Gamble teaches a stator with a recess (FIG. 2; 22, 24) for two biasing magnets (FIG. 2; 26, 28) being formed in a portion of the magnetic path part that is different from the pair of magnetic poles (FIG. 2; 45A, 45B), around which the pair of coil bodies are not wound, and that faces the magnet.
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary reciprocating drive actuator of Tsunoda in view of Benner with the teachings of Gamble to position the biasing magnets away from the magnetic poles to provide a more substantial restoring force contrary to the direction of the magnetic poles.
Regarding claim 2, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 1, wherein Tsunoda further teaches the core body being composed of a plurality of divided bodies (FIG. 2; 18a, 18b), and the plurality of divided bodies include a plurality of same-shaped cores disposed symmetrically about the magnet, having identical shapes, and each including one of the pair of magnetic poles (FIG. 2; 19a, 19b) and a portion of the magnetic path part (FIG. 2; 20a, 20b).
Regarding claim 3, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 2, wherein Tsunoda further teaches the divided bodies being divided at a position other than that of the recess (FIG. 2; 21a, 21b).
Regarding claim 4, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 1, wherein Benner further teaches the recess having a width that matches a width of the biasing part (FIG. 9; 138, 134).
Regarding claim 5, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 1, wherein Tsunoda further teaches another biasing part (FIG. 2, 17b) that is disposed to face the biasing part with the magnet therebetween and has a function identical to that of the biasing part.
Regarding claim 6, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 4, wherein Tsunoda further teaches the magnetic including a plurality of magnetic pole switching parts (FIG. 1, 8, portions circumferentially between N and S poles) that are symmetrically disposed in the circumferential direction, the plurality of magnetic pole switching parts respectively facing the plurality of magnetic poles when the magnet is located at the initial position (FIG. 1, the magnet 8 when aligned with the biasing parts 17a and 17b would have its midpoints facing magnetic poles 19a and 19b).
Regarding claim 7, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 1, wherein Tsunoda further teaches the magnet being magnetized into two poles (FIG. 1, 8; S, N).
Regarding claim 8, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 1, wherein Tsunoda further teaches the biasing part being a magnet (Column 3 lines 26-32).
Regarding claim 9, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 5, wherein Tsunoda further teaches the biasing part being a permanent magnet, and the other biasing part being a permanent magnet (Column 3 lines 26-32).
Regarding claim 10, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 1, wherein Tsunoda further teaches the unit main body including a pair of shaft supports (FIG. 4; 2, 5) disposed with the core body between the shaft supports in an axial direction of the shaft part, the pair of shaft supports covering the core body, the coil bodies, the magnet, and the biasing part from both sides in the axial direction (Column 2 lines 56-58) and rotatably supporting the shaft part passing through the unit main body (Column 2 lines 60-62).
Regarding claim 11, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 1, wherein Tsunoda further teaches a movable object (FIG. 4, 6) being fixed to the shaft part, and an end of the shaft part on a side of the movable object being rotatably supported by a rotation support part of the unit main body (FIG. 4, upper part of 5).
Claim 12 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble and in further view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2013/0002052 to Hunter et al. (hereinafter Hunter).
Regarding claim 12, Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble teaches the rotary reciprocating drive actuator according to claim 10.
Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble does not teach the pair of shaft supports having electrical conductivity.
However, Hunter teaches a housing (FIG. 9A, 612) surrounding a stator assembly having electrical conductivity (Paragraph [0057]).
Therefore, it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to modify the rotary reciprocating drive actuator of Tsunoda in view of Benner and Gamble with the metal housing of Hunter to more easily direct magnetic flux within the device and prevent electromagnetic interference from external sources.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JOSHUA KIEL MIGUEL RODRIGUEZ whose telephone number is (571)272-9881. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday 9:30am - 7:00pm ET.
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, Tulsidas Patel can be reached at (571) 272-2098. 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.
/JOSHUA KIEL M RODRIGUEZ/Examiner, Art Unit 2834
/TULSIDAS C PATEL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2834
