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
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, 3-5, 7, 15-18, and 20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Gruring EP 3144741.
With regard to claim 1 Gruring discloses a guide element for guiding the pivoting, about an axis, of a balance wheel (de balancier paragraphs 32, 36) of a timepiece, comprising:
a first guide bearing (13) which does not have a shock absorber (figure 2 there is no shock absorber at the bearing region), and
a first blank (5 and 29),
the first blank comprising:
at least one first portion for fixing to another blank (5 figure 2 see screw mount),
a first receiving portion (7) for receiving the first guide bearing (figure 2 the element 7 receives 13), and
at least one first flexible arm (flexible hinges 9a figure 2) mechanically connecting the first fixing portion to the first receiving portion (see figure 2).
With regard to claim 3 Gruring discloses the guide element as claimed in claim 1, wherein the guide element comprises multiple first flexible arms (9a, and/or 15a) mechanically connecting the at least one first fixing portion (5) to the first receiving portion (7, 17a, b could also read on the portion as well as any intermediate element).
With regard to claim 4 Gruring discloses the guide element as claimed in claim 1, wherein
the one or more first arms comprise an open-worked geometry, and/or
the one or more first arms extend substantially radially to the direction of the axis, and/or
each arm comprises two parallel branches extending from the one or more first fixing portions and coming close to one another in the vicinity of the first receiving portion for receiving the guide bearing (see figure 2).
PNG
media_image1.png
80
96
media_image1.png
Greyscale
The arms have open work geometry extend radially and have at least two branches.
With regard to claim 5 Gruring discloses the guide element as claimed in claim 1, wherein
the first fixing portion is in the form of a rim (5 and 29 figure 2), and/or the first receiving portion for receiving the first guide bearing has a thickness of less than 0.23 mm along the axis.Regarding the term rim, it is noted that the external supports surround and form the external frame of the internal parts. It is noted the claim does not recite specific geometries such as circular or cylindrical.
With regard to claim 7 Gruring discloses the guide element as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first fixing portion comprises a first receiving portion for receiving a first guide bearing for an escapement wheel (paragraph 22 – Genequand type of escapement that can be mounted rigidly to the bridge.)
With regard to claim 15 Gruring discloses a timepiece module comprising:
a guide element as claimed in claim 1,
a balance wheel (paragraph 22; no reference numeral but shown on escapement wheel 4 figure 1),
a pallet assembly (palettes 3a paragraph 22; figure 1), and
an escapement wheel (4a figure 1; see also claim 9).
With regard to claim 16 Gruring discloses a timepiece movement (abstract – d’un movement hologer) comprising a guide element as claimed in claim 1.
With regard to claim 17 Gruring discloses a timepiece (claim 10 piece d’horlogerie) comprising a timepiece movement (abstract) as claimed in claim 16.
With regard to claim 18 Gruring discloses the guide element as claimed in claim 1, wherein the first blank is a first balance bar or cock (figure 2 depicts a balance support; paragraph 32).
With regard to claim 20 Gruring discloses the guide element as claimed in claim 3, wherein the guide element comprises from two to four of the first flexible arms (figure 2, each arm is provided in a set).
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, 6, and 8-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gruring EP 3144741With regard to claim 2 (depends from claim 1) Gruring does not disclose the claimed: wherein
the at least one first arm is configured and/or designed so as to define a stiffness of movement of the first receiving portion of less than 100 N/mm along the direction of the axis, and/or
the at least one first arm is configured and/or designed so that the first receiving portion can be moved by more than 0.05 mm along the direction of the axis.
Before the earliest effective filing date to configure Gruring’s system to comprise: the at least one first arm is configured and/or designed so as to define a stiffness of movement of the first receiving portion of less than 100 N/mm along the direction of the axis, and/or
the at least one first arm is configured and/or designed so that the first receiving portion can be moved by more than 0.05 mm along the direction of the axis.
The reason for doing so would have been to protect against environmental damage such as shocks or impacts. In example a limit of .05mm or less would not be sufficient movement to protect the pivot against shocks or impacts.
With regard to claim 6 (depends from claim 1) Gruring does not disclose the claimed wherein one of the at least one first arms comprises a balance spring stud holder.
The inventive concept is for the structure to support a balance wheel and act as the bearing support therefore. There is no discussion of the spring and thus the reference fails to teach the claimed limitations. Nonetheless the point and purpose is to support the balance and spring. The spring must be held at one end to allow the balance to progress as an oscillating element. If the spring were supported relative to another structure the elastic nature of the bearing support may cause interference issues due to the movement. Thus the logical way to attach the spring is to the support structure. For these reasons it is concluded that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to configure Gruring’s system to comprise: one of the at least one first arms comprises a balance spring stud holder. The reason for doing so would have been to secure the spring in an operational fashion with the least risk for interference or negative effect of the Gruring structure; as well as to form an operational device as disclosed.
With regard to claim 8 the item matching is the same as claim 1 except it is directed to the other side of the bearing, i.e. top and bottom.
It is possible that Gruring fails to teach the second bearing in the same style, thus this limitation is treated as not taught for the purposes of claim analysis. Before the earliest effective filing date it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art to configure Gruring’s system to comprise: a second guide bearing which does not have a shock absorber, and
a second blank, in particular a second balance bar or a plate,
the second blank comprising:
at least one second portion for fixing to the first blank,
a second receiving portion for receiving the second guide bearing, and
at least one second flexible arm mechanically connecting the at least one second fixing portion to the second receiving portion.
The reason for doing so would have been to form a complete bearing top and bottom including the advantages of the system taught by Gruring such as elastic play, movement, and ability to accommodate shocks and other such environmental concerns.
With regard to claim 9 (depends from claim 8) Gruring does not disclose the claimed: wherein
the at least one second arm is configured and/or designed so as to define a stiffness of movement of the second receiving portion of less than 100 N/mm along the direction of the axis, and/or
the at least one second arm is configured and/or designed so that the second receiving portion can be moved by more than 0.05 mm along the direction of the axis.Before the earliest effective filing date to configure Gruring’s system to comprise: the at least one second arm is configured and/or designed so as to define a stiffness of movement of the second receiving portion of less than 100 N/mm along the direction of the axis, and/or the at least one second arm is configured and/or designed so that the second receiving portion can be moved by more than 0.05 mm along the direction of the axis.
The reason for doing so would have been to protect against environmental damage such as shocks or impacts. In example a limit of .05mm or less would not be sufficient movement to protect the pivot against shocks or impacts.With regard to claim 10 Gruring teaches the guide element as claimed in claim 8, wherein the guide element comprises multiple second flexible arms (9a, and/or 15a) mechanically connecting the at least one second fixing portion (5) to the second receiving portion (7, 17a, b could also read on the portion as well as any intermediate element).
With regard to claim 11 Gruring teaches the guide element as claimed in claim 8, wherein
the one or more second arms comprise an open-worked geometry, and/or
the one or more second arms extend substantially radially to the direction of the axis, and/or
each arm comprises two parallel branches extending from the one or more second fixing portions and coming close to one another in a vicinity of the second receiving portion for receiving the guide bearing (see figure 2).
The arms have open work geometry extend radially and have at least two branches.
With regard to claim 12 Gruring teaches the guide element as claimed in claim 8, wherein
the second fixing portion has a shape of a rim (5 and 29 figure 2), and/or the second receiving portion for receiving the second guide bearing has a thickness of less than 0.23 mm along the axis.Regarding the term rim, it is noted that the external supports surround and form the external frame of the internal parts. It is noted the claim does not recite specific geometries such as circular or cylindrical.
With regard to claim 13 (depends from claim 8) Gruring does not disclose the claimed wherein one of the at least one second arms comprises a balance spring stud holder.
The inventive concept is for the structure to support a balance wheel and act as the bearing support therefore. There is no discussion of the spring and thus the reference fails to teach the claimed limitations. None the less the point and purpose is to support the balance and spring. The spring must be held at one end to allow the balance to progress as an oscillating element. If the spring were supported relative to another structure the elastic nature of the bearing support may cause interference issues due to the movement. Thus the logical way to attach the spring is to the support structure. For these reasons it is concluded that it would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the earliest effective filing date to configure Gruring’s system to comprise: one of the at least one second arms comprises a balance spring stud holder. The reason for doing so would have been to secure the spring in an operational fashion with the least risk for interference or negative effect of the Gruring structure; as well as to form an operational device as disclosed.
With regard to claim 14 Gruring teaches the guide element as claimed in claim 8, wherein
the at least one second fixing portion comprises a second receiving portion for receiving a guide bearing for an escapement wheel, and/or the at least one second fixing portion comprises a second receiving portion for receiving a guide bearing for a pallet assembly (paragraph 22 – Genequand type of escapement that can be mounted rigidly to the bridge.)
Claim 19 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Gruring EP 3144741 in view of Gigon (US 2023/0408981).
With regard to claim 19 (depends from claim 2) Gruring does not disclose the claimed: wherein the at least one first arm is configured and/or designed so as to define the stiffness of movement of the first receiving portion of less than 50 N/mm along the direction of the axis.
Paragraph 53: gripping of a component of diameter 34 mm; thus has a stiffness per jaw between 25 N/mm and 45 N/mm, more particularly between 30 N/mm and 40 N/mm.
Before the earliest effective filing date to configure Gruring’s system to comprise: at least one first arm is configured and/or designed so as to define the stiffness of movement of the first receiving portion of less than 50 N/mm along the direction of the axis. The reason for doing so would have been to set the force of the elastic element to a normal and routine value for an elastic element in a timepiece environment, as taught by Gigon.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Villon (US 448896) is a shock absorption bearing with an apparent rigid central bearing support.
Putnam teaches a balance wheel bridge. Note element 22 figure 5. See description of figure 4: Fig. 4 is a view similar to Fig. 3 with portions of the movement unit broken away and the bridge-member shown as markedly flexed.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to SEAN KAYES whose telephone number is (571)272-8931. The examiner can normally be reached 10-6.
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.
/SEAN KAYES/Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2831
Prosecution Insights