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 § 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 and 5 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Cha (US 10,801,610).
Cha discloses and shows a shift device comprising:
an operation body (Fig. 8, item 570) on which a plurality of shift positions are set on a front side surface (Fig. 2), the operation body being configured to be displaceable toward a back side when pressed; and
a detection portion (200), the detection portion being configured to detect a touch operation on the shift position and a pressing operation on the operation body, and to change a shift range of a transmission of a vehicle, and to detect the pressing operation on the operation body by detecting a displacement distance of the operation body toward the back side (col. 8:39-51).
Cl. 3 – the detection portion is configured to detect the touch operation on the shift position and then to detect the pressing operation on the operation body to change the shift range (col. 8: 39-51).
Cl. 5 – the shift device further comprises a biasing member (Fig. 8, items 210,220), the biasing member being elastically contractible and connected to the operation body (570), wherein the operation body is configured to be displaced toward the back side against a biasing force of the biasing member when pressed (col. 8: 39-51).
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 4 and 6 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Cha, as applied to claim 1, in view of Kim et al. (KR 2022-0037751).
Cha discloses and shows the invention of claim 1 as described elsewhere above.
Regarding claim 4, Cha does not include a restricted groove is formed at the operation body. Kim discloses and shows a restriction mechanism (Fig. 3, items 31-34) configured to restrict the pressing operation on an operation body (Fig. 2, items 21-24) at a predetermined opportunity (such as while the vehicle is in motion) by restricting displacement of the operation body toward the back side (paras 0050, 0057-0059 of English translation supplied in the July 14, 2025 Office Action), the restriction mechanism prevents an erroneous operation by the driver (Abstract).
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 Cha shift device to include a restriction mechanism so as to restrict the pressing operation thus preventing an erroneous operation by the driver.
Regarding claim 6, Cha does not include a restricted groove is formed at the operation body and a restriction mechanism. Kim discloses and shows a restricted groove (27) formed at the operation bodies (Fig. 2, items 21-24), the restriction mechanism includes a restricting portion (Fig. 3, items 31-34), the restricting portion being configured to restrict the displacement of the operation body toward the back side by being inserted into the restricted groove (paras 0050, 0057-0059 of English translation supplied in the July 14, 2025 Office Action), the restricted groove and restriction mechanism prevents an erroneous operation by the driver (Abstract).
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 Cha shift device to include a restricted groove is formed at the operation body and a restriction mechanism so as to prevent an erroneous operation by the driver.
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed Oct. 6, 2025 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive.
Applicant asserts at page 5 that Cha, “neither discloses nor suggests the invention defined in amended claim 1. After further review of the reference to Cha, it has been found that the operation body (570) is configured to be displaceable toward a back side (downward toward 510) when pressed and the detection portion (pressure sensors 210,220) detects the pressing operation on the operation body by detecting a displacement distance of the operation body toward the back side.
Thus, Cha fully anticipates claim 1.
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 BOBBY RUSHING, JR whose telephone number is (571)270-0501. The examiner can normally be reached Monday - Friday, 8AM-5PM EST.
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, Minnah Seoh can be reached at (571) 270-7778. 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.
/BOBBY RUSHING, JR/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618