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, the “pressed part”, “pressing part”, “rotating shaft”, “connecting hole”, “lower groove”, “groove bottom”, “upper groove body”, “lower groove body” and “groove opening” must be shown or the feature(s) canceled from the claim(s). No new matter should be entered.
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. The figure or figure number of an amended drawing should not be labeled as “amended.” If a drawing figure is to be canceled, the appropriate figure must be removed from the replacement sheet, and where necessary, the remaining figures must be renumbered and appropriate changes made to the brief description of the several views of the drawings for consistency. Additional replacement sheets may be necessary to show the renumbering of the remaining figures. 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
Claim 1 objected to because of the following informalities: “forms rotating connection” is missing the word “a”. Appropriate correction is required.
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.
Claims 1-20 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.
Claims 1, 5, 7, 9-13 and 20 are rejected as reciting the limitation “riveting”, “riveted” and “rivets”, but the disclosure does not teach riveting or the use of rivets anywhere in the claims or specification.
Claim 1 recites the limitation “the frictional force allowing the puller to rotate to any angle to be suspended”, but the puller can clearly only rotate through a limited range rather than “any angle”.
Claim 2 recites the limitation “an open end of the positioning groove at the open end of the positioning groove” which appears to be nonsensical.
Claim 3 recites the limitation “the open end of the positioning groove at the open end of the positioning groove” which appears to be nonsensical.
Claim 4 recites the limitation “the open end of the positioning groove across the open end of the positioning groove” which appears to be nonsensical.
Claims 6 and 14-16 recite the limitation “the clamping opening is clamped to the blocking protrusion”. It is unclear how an opening can be clamped.
Claim 7 recites “the blocking protrusion arches the end pressing member” which is not understood. The pressing member appears to be arched regardless of the blocking protrusion and it is unclear how the blocking protrusion could create more arching.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the positioning groove" in line 4. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 recites the limitation "the slot" in line 7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 8 further recites a “lower groove”, “groove bottom”, “boss”, “upper groove body” and “lower groove body” which are not shown clearly in the drawings and therefore cannot be fully understood. These structures cannot be meaningfully evaluated without sufficient support and disclosure.
Claim 9 recites the limitation "the bending arm" in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 sets forth limitation which appear contradictory. The claim recites “the riveting portion only rivets a middle of the pressing member” and “the end pressing member is placed in the pressing member groove, but is not riveted” which implies a state change in the device. It is not sufficiently clear what is intended to be claimed.
Claim 20 sets forth limitation which appear contradictory. The claim recites “the riveting portion only rivets a middle of the pressing member” and “the end pressing member is placed in the pressing member groove, but is not riveted” which implies a state change in the device. It is not sufficiently clear what is intended to be claimed.
The remaining limitations are rejected as depending from rejected claims.
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.
Claim(s) 1 and 5-10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yaguramaki, EP 0640300 in view of Damon, U.S. Patent 8,341,809.
Regarding Claim 1, insofar as the claim is understood, Yaguramaki teaches:
A slider body (1) and a puller (14-16), wherein the slider body comprises a base portion (2), a guide column (see below) is disposed on one side of a middle of a top surface of the base portion, a left side and a right side of the base portion are symmetrically provided with a left stopper and a right stopper (see below), top ends of the left stopper and the right stopper extend inwardly (see clinched projections Col 5, Lns 27-31), a Y-shaped zipper alignment channel (see below) is formed in a space enclosed by the left stopper and the right stopper under the separation of the guide column, and the zipper alignment channel is opened upwardly (see Fig. 1); the puller comprises a rotating shaft (16) disposed at a front end and configured to be connected with the slider body; characterized in that the invisible slider further comprises an end pressing member (3) installed at a top of the guide column (fig. 3), the end pressing member having a pressed part (13) at a front end and a pressing part (12) at a rear end; and a riveting portion is disposed at a position corresponding to the pressed part at the top of the guide column (see 8, see Col 5, Lns 27-31), the riveting portion riveting the pressed part at the front end of the end pressing member (see Col 5, Lns 27-31); and the rotating shaft of the puller is sandwiched between the pressing part at the rear end of the end pressing member and the guide column and forms rotating connection, and the rotating shaft of the puller is in contact with the pressing part and the guide column under the pressing of the pressing part, and a frictional force is present between the rotating shaft of the puller and the pressing part and between the rotating shaft of the puller and the guide column (see figs. 3, 6).
Yaguramaki does not teach:
The frictional force allowing the puller to rotate to any angle to be suspended.
Damon teaches a slider and a puller wherein:
A frictional force allowing the puller to rotate to any angle to be suspended (see Col 5, Lns 57-65).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Yagauramaki with the friction necessary to maintain the puller at any angle to be suspended because that allow a user to easily located the zipper pull in low light conditions or situations that require a user’s attention to be elsewhere.
**Examiner’s note: the claim language “the frictional force allowing the puller to rotate to any angle to be suspended“ is considered functional language failing to limit the structure of the claimed invention. The prior art must only be capable of performing said functional recitations to be applicable and in the instant case the prior art of Yaguramaki-Damon is indeed capable. Note that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
PNG
media_image1.png
336
444
media_image1.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image2.png
328
364
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 5, insofar as the claim is understood, in the instant combination, Yaguramaki teaches:
The top of the guide column is provided with a downwardly recessed pressing member groove (see above), the pressed part of the end pressing member is placed in the pressing member groove, left and right displacements of the end pressing member are limited by the pressing member groove (see fig. 2), and the riveting portions are disposed on both sides of a groove opening of the pressing member groove (see elements 8).
Regarding Claim 6, in the instant combination, Yaguramaki teaches:
The pressing member groove is provided with a blocking protrusion (see below), the end pressing member is provided with a clamping opening (see below) adapted to the blocking protrusion, the clamping opening is clamped to the blocking protrusion, and sliding of the end pressing member in the pressing member groove is limited by the blocking protrusion.
**Examiner’s note: the claim language “sliding of the…the blocking protrusion“ is considered functional language failing to limit the structure of the claimed invention. The prior art must only be capable of performing said functional recitations to be applicable and in the instant case the prior art of Yaguramaki-Damon is indeed capable. Note that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying the claimed structural limitations. Ex parte Masham, 2 USPQ2d 1647 (1987).
PNG
media_image3.png
354
512
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 7, insofar as the claim is understood, in the instant combination, Yaguramaki teaches:
A height of the blocking protrusion is greater than a height of the clamping opening (see fig. 3, see drawing selection above), the blocking protrusion arches the end pressing member when the pressed part of the end pressing member is placed in the pressing member groove (see fig. 3, see 112 rejection above), but is not riveted (see 112 rejection), and a bottom surface of the end pressing member is not in contact with a groove bottom of the pressing member groove (see drawing selection above, see fig. 3 and note silhouette of raised position of element 3).
Regarding Claim 8, insofar as the claim is understood, in the instant combination Yaguramaki teaches:
the top surface of the guide column is provided with a lower groove (see below), a groove bottom (see below) of the lower groove protrudes upwardly to form a boss (see below), and a top surface of the boss is recessed downwardly to form the positioning groove; and the boss divides the lower groove into an upper groove body (see below) and a lower groove body (see below), the upper groove body being the pressing member groove and the lower groove body being disposed as the slot (see 112 rejection above).
PNG
media_image4.png
426
608
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 9, insofar as the claim is understood, in the instant combination Yaguramaki teaches:
The bending arm (see below) serves as the rear end of the end pressing member, the riveting portion only rivets a middle of the end pressing member (see 8 in fig. 3), and an outer surface of the front end of the end pressing member is lower than the groove opening of the pressing member groove when the end pressing member is placed in the pressing member groove, but is not riveted (see fig. 6).
PNG
media_image5.png
288
363
media_image5.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 10, insofar as the claim is understood, in the instant combination, Yaguramaki teaches:
The bending arm serves as the rear end of the end pressing member, and the riveting portion rivets the front end and a middle of the end pressing member (see above, see fig. 3).
Claim(s) 1-2 and 11 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin, U.S. Patent 10,485,308 in view of Damon ‘809.
Regarding Claim 1, insofar as the claim is understood, Lin teaches:
A slider body (1) and a puller (3), wherein the slider body comprises a base portion (1B), a guide column (12) is disposed on one side of a middle of a top surface of the base portion, a left side and a right side of the base portion are symmetrically provided with a left stopper and a right stopper (see 121, 122), top ends of the left stopper and the right stopper extend inwardly (see fig. 4), a Y-shaped zipper alignment channel (see below) is formed in a space enclosed by the left stopper and the right stopper under the separation of the guide column, and the zipper alignment channel is opened upwardly (see Fig. 1); the puller comprises a rotating shaft (30) disposed at a front end and configured to be connected with the slider body; characterized in that the invisible slider further comprises an end pressing member (2) installed at a top of the guide column (Fig. 2), the end pressing member having a pressed part (22) at a front end and a pressing part (21) at a rear end; and a riveting portion is disposed at a position corresponding to the pressed part at the top of the guide column (see 12, 22 in Fig. 4), the riveting portion riveting the pressed part at the front end of the end pressing member (see 12, 22 in Fig. 4); and the rotating shaft of the puller is sandwiched between the pressing part at the rear end of the end pressing member and the guide column and forms rotating connection (see figs. 4-8), and the rotating shaft of the puller is in contact with the pressing part and the guide column under the pressing of the pressing part, and a frictional force is present between the rotating shaft of the puller and the pressing part and between the rotating shaft of the puller and the guide column (see figs. 5, 7, 8).
Lin does not teach:
The frictional force allowing the puller to rotate to any angle to be suspended.
Damon teaches a slider and a puller wherein:
A frictional force allowing the puller to rotate to any angle to be suspended (see Col 5, Lns 57-65).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Lin with the friction necessary to maintain the puller at any angle to be suspended because that allow a user to easily located the zipper pull in low light conditions or situations that require a user’s attention to be elsewhere.
**Examiner’s note: the claim language “the frictional force allowing the puller to rotate to any angle to be suspended“ is considered functional language failing to limit the structure of the claimed invention. The prior art must only be capable of performing said functional recitations to be applicable and in the instant case the prior art of Lin is indeed capable. Note that it has been held that a recitation with respect to the manner in which a claimed apparatus is intended to be employed does not differentiate the claimed apparatus from a prior art apparatus satisfying
PNG
media_image6.png
359
409
media_image6.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 2, the instant combination of Lin-Damon teaches:
The top of the guide column is provided with a positioning groove (see below) which is open and configured to place the rotating shaft of the puller, a connecting hole (see below) is formed in a space (see below) enclosed by the pressing part of the end pressing member and an open end of the positioning groove at the open end of the positioning groove (see 112 rejection above), the rotating shaft of the puller is mounted in the connecting hole to form the rotating connection, and the rotating shaft of the puller is in contact with a hole wall of the connecting hole (see below), and a frictional force is present between the rotating shaft of the puller and the hole wall of the connecting hole (this is considered inherent), the frictional force allowing the puller to rotate to any angle to be suspended (see teachings of Damon above in the rejection of Claim 1).
PNG
media_image7.png
319
438
media_image7.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claim 11, in the instant combination, Lin teaches:
The top of the guide column is provided with a downwardly recessed pressing member groove (see drawing selection from rejection of Claim 1), the pressed part of the end pressing member is placed in the pressing member groove (see Fig. 2), left and right displacements of the end pressing member are limited by the pressing member groove (see Fig. 2), and the riveting portions are disposed on both sides of a groove opening of the pressing member groove (see Fig. 4).
Claim(s) 3-4, 12-19 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin-Damon as applied to claims 1-2 above, and further in view of Lin, U.S. Patent 10,561,207.
Regarding Claim 3, Lin-Damon teaches:
The positioning groove has a downward concave…structure (see drawing selection above), the pressing part of the end pressing member is a bending arm, and the connecting hole is formed in a space enclosed by the bending arm and the open end of the positioning groove at the open end of the positioning groove (see drawing selection above).
Lin-Damon does not teach the downward concave structure being arc-shaped.
Lin ‘207 teaches a downward concave structure being arc-shaped (see fig. 4, element 2000 resides in an arc-shaped downward concave structure).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to provide Lin-Damon with an arc-shaped concave structure as taught by Lin ‘207 because the arc-shaped structure would permit the rotating shaft to roll in the concave structure rather than slide which would reduce wear-and-tear and therefore improve the lifespan of the product.
Regarding Claim 4, in the instant combination, Lin ‘308 teaches:
The bending arm serves as an end structure of the end pressing member (see fig. 5, element 23), the top surface of the guide column is provided with a downwardly recessed slot (see 110), the slot is located at one side of the positioning groove (see fig. 5, see drawing selection in rejection of Claim 2), the connecting hole is formed in a space enclosed by the bending arm and the open end of the positioning groove across the open end of the positioning groove, and an end of the bending arm is inserted into the slot (see fig. 5, element 25).
Regarding Claims 12-13, see rejection of Claim 11 in light of rejections of Claims 3-4.
Regarding Claim 14, in the instant combination, Lin ‘308 teaches:
The pressing member groove is provided with a blocking protrusion (see below), the end pressing member is provided with a clamping opening (see below) adapted to the blocking protrusion, the clamping opening is clamped to the blocking protrusion, and sliding of the end pressing member in the pressing member groove is limited by the blocking protrusion (see drawing selection, sliding is clearly inhibited).
PNG
media_image8.png
308
453
media_image8.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 15-16, see rejection of Claim 14 in light of rejection of Claims 12-13 above.
Regarding Claim 17, insofar as the claim is understood, in the instant combination, Lin ‘308 teaches:
The top surface of the guide column is provided with a lower groove, a groove bottom of the lower groove protrudes upwardly to form a boss, and a top surface of the boss is recessed downwardly to form the positioning groove; and the boss divides the lower groove into an upper groove body and a lower groove body, the upper groove body being the pressing member groove and the lower groove body being disposed as the slot (see drawing selection below).
PNG
media_image9.png
515
673
media_image9.png
Greyscale
Regarding Claims 18-19, see rejection of Claim 17 in light of rejection of Claims 12-13 above.
Claim(s) 20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Lin-Damon as applied to claims 1-2 and 11 above, and further in view of Yaguramaki ‘809.
Regarding Claim 20, insofar as the claim is understood, in the instant combination Lin teaches:
The bending arm serves as the rear end of the end pressing member (sliders operate in both directions so it is arbitrary to designate the bending arm as the rear end)…an outer surface of the front end of the end pressing member is lower than the groove opening of the pressing member groove when the end pressing member is placed in the pressing member groove (see 27 in fig. 5) when the end pressing member is placed in the pressing member groove, but is not riveted (insofar as this claim is understood, the prior art is interpreted to meet this limitation, see figs. 2, 4, 5).
Lin-Damon does not teach:
The riveting portion only rivets a middle of the end pressing member.
Yaguramaki teaches a slider with an end pressing member wherein:
The riveting portion only rivets a middle of the end pressing member (see rejection of Claim 9 above).
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed to rearrange the Lin-Damon device such that the riveting portion would only rivet a middle of the end pressing member because that would allow for “riveting” a smaller number of elements (two instead of four, see 111, 112, 121, 122 of Lin) and that would reduce manufacturing costs by simplifying the “riveting” steps.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MATTHEW J SULLIVAN whose telephone number is (571)270-5218. The examiner can normally be reached IFP, Typically M-Th, 8:00-6:00, regular Fr availability.
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, Jason San can be reached at 571-272-6531. 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.
/M.J.S/Examiner, Art Unit 3677
/JASON W SAN/SPE, Art Unit 3677