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 under 37 CFR 1.83(a). The drawings must show every feature of the invention specified in the claims. Therefore,
In claim 1, the phrases: “a sliding guide”, “a first and a second plane”, “first aperture”, “second aperture”, “the first pr the second planes”.
must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The reference character “6” has been used to designate “component”, and “body” and “movable element”.
In claim 1, the phrases: “a sliding guide”, “a first and a second plane”, “first aperture”, “second aperture”, “the first pr the second planes” are not described in the specification. Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Objections
Claims 1 and 7 are objected to because of the following informalities:
Claim 1: The term “can be” in claim 1 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “can be” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
Appropriate correction is required.Claim 7:at the end of the second actuator, delete “.”
This is an exemplary of the errors. Applicant should carefully review the entire specification/drawings to fix this issue.
Use consistent phraseology to describe a component, part or element in the specification/drawings.
Please ensure that the remainder of elements referenced in the specification are accurately accounted for in the Drawings.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
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.
Claim 11 is 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.
The term “can be” in claim 11 is a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “can be” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention.
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 1-11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kopejtko (EP 3961925 A1) in view of Weiland Achim (DE 102008023761 A1).
Regarding claim 1, Kopejtko discloses device comprising:
an actuator (10), preferably linear, comprising a sliding guide into which a movable element (10) is slidingly mounted;
a first and a second plane overlapping each other at a predetermined distance, one of said two planes having said movable element (10) integral with it slidingly mounted, into the sliding guide, between a position extracted at least partially from the sliding guide and a position retracted at least partially into the sliding guide, said actuator being able to be activated for moving along said sliding guide said movable element (10) in such a way that said plane is movable through the movement of said movable element (10) thus enabling it to move towards/away from the other plane (see Fig. 5 and 6);
Kopejtko discloses the claimed subject as disclosed above, however, fails to explicitly disclose the seat into which a probe of made from an electrically conductive material is/can be arranged, said seat being interposed between said first and said second plane, said seat having a first aperture, which faces one of the first pr the second planes and a second aperture facing another one of the first or the second planes, and through which two probe ends protrude at least partially in order to be able to bring into contact each of the two probe ends respectively with the one of the first or the second planes facing the aperture.
Achim discloses a device comprising the probe (4, Figure 1).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the probe as taught by Achim with Kopejtko’s device for the purpose of detecting the presence or absence of a substance, typically by sensing electrical conductivity, which turns pumps, valves, or alarms on or off.
Regarding claims 2 and 3, Kopejtko discloses:
The actuator is configured to generate a first magnetic field, and wherein the movable element is a body sensitive to said first magnetic field (2a) such that, when said first magnetic field has been generated, a first magnetic force is generated which causes a motion along said guide of said movable element with a consequent approach of the one of the first or the second plane towards the other one of the first or the second plane, thereby bringing into electrical contact said first and said second plane to each other through a contact of each one of said first and said second planes with said interposed probe.
wherein said actuator is further configured to generate a second magnetic field (4a) which generates a second force opposite to said first force in such a way as to determine a moving-away motion along said guide of the one of the first or the second
Regarding claims 4-6, Kopejtko discloses:
both of said first and said second planes are electrically conductive.
both of said first and said second planes are configured as a PCB.
the one of the first or the second plane is fixed and the
Regarding claims 7-9, Kopejtko discloses the claimed subject as disclosed above, however, fails to explicitly disclose the actuator is a magnetic or an electromechanical type actuator.
the movable element is part of the actuator.
the movable element is a magnet, sliding into the sliding guide which is obtained directly in a body of the actuator.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the actuator is a magnetic or an electromechanical type actuator; the movable element is part of the actuator; the movable element is a magnet, sliding into the sliding guide which is obtained directly in a body of the actuator for the purpose of suitability of the design choice for the purpose of converting electrical energy into mechanical movement using a magnetic field.
Regarding claims 9-11, Kopejtko discloses the claimed subject as disclosed above, however, fails to explicitly disclose the second plane is fixed and a probe end is in contact with said second plane in such a way that an opposite end of the probe is directed at the first plane which is movable, said first plane being integral with the movable element;
a housing which can be opened into at least two halves for enabling access to the seat of the
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the housing which can be opened into at least two halves for enabling access to the seat of the.
Claims 12-13 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Kopejtko (EP 3961925 A1) and Weiland Achim (DE 102008023761 A1) in view of Amelio (WO 2021250598 A1).
Regarding claims 12-13, Kopejtko discloses the claimed subject as disclosed above, however, fails to explicitly disclose the bottom of the guide is delimited by the second plane, and wherein, when the probe is separated from the first plane, a space is formed between the second plate and a base of the movable element;
the method comprising; arranging a relay system according to claim 1; and
activating the actuator in a direction in such a way as to bring the first and the second plane into a condition of electrical contact with each other through the probe interposed therebetween, thereby bringing the relay system into an ON condition.
Amelio discloses the device comprising:
the bottom of the guide is delimited by the second plane, and wherein, when the probe is separated from the first plane, a space is formed between the second plate and a base of the movable element;
activating the actuator in a direction in such a way as to bring the first and the second plane into a condition of electrical contact with each other through the probe interposed therebetween, thereby bringing the relay system into an ON condition (see Figures 9-11).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art, before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to make the actuator activating in a direction in such a way as to bring the first and the second plane into a condition of electrical contact with each other through the probe interposed therebetween, thereby bringing the relay system into an ON condition as taught by Amelio with Kopejtko’s device for the purpose of measuring displacement, generate linear electrostatic force, or detecting pressure differentials, and ensuring safe, reliable remote switching and protects power grids from electrical faults.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication should be directed to Lisa Homza whose telephone number is (571) 272-3592.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner's supervisor, Shawki Ismail can be reached on (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 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). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Lisa Nhung Homza/
Patent Examiner - Art Unit 2837
May 26, 2026
/SHAWKI S ISMAIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights