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 .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Appropriate correction is required.
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)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-13, 15-17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Yano et al. (US 2013/0057369).
Regarding claim 1, Yano discloses a device comprising:
a first fixed terminal (33, right) including a first fixed contact (33a, right);
a second fixed terminal (33, left) positioned on left of the first fixed terminal (33, right) and including a second fixed contact (33a, left);
a movable contactor (see the drawing below) including a first projection (48a, right) that comes into contact with or is separated from the first fixed contact (33a, right); and
a first magnet (36, right) facing the movable contactor (48, see the drawing below), wherein the first magnet (36, right) is provided on a right side of a right end of the movable contactor (see the drawing below),
the first projection (48a, right) overlaps the first fixed contact (33a, right) in top view, and
a right end of the first fixed contact (33a, right) is positioned on a left side of the right end of the movable contactor (see the drawing below) and on a right side of a right end of the first projection (48a). Since the structure of Yano is similar with the structure of the applicant’s invention, it would design the same structure.
[AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Outer edge of the first fixed contact)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (Outer edge of movable contactor)][AltContent: textbox (Movable contactor)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
299
278
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 2, Yano discloses:
a length that is a distance from the right end to a left end of the movable contactor (see the drawing above) is larger than a width of the movable contactor (see the drawing below), and the first magnet overlaps the movable contactor as viewed from right.
Regarding claim 3, Yano discloses:
a left end of the second fixed contact (33a, left) is positioned on a right side of a left end of the movable contactor (48, see the drawing below). Since the structure of Yano is similar with the structure of the applicant’s invention, it would design the same structure.
Regarding claim 4, Yano discloses:
the first fixed contact (33a, right) overlaps the movable contactor (48, see the drawing below) in top view, and
an outer edge of the first fixed contact (33a, right) is positioned inside an outer edge of the movable contactor (see the drawing below) in top view.
PNG
media_image2.png
306
491
media_image2.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 5, Yano discloses:
the movable contactor (48, see the drawing above) further includes a first base (see the drawing below),
the first base (see the drawing below) is positioned on a right side of the first projection (see the drawing below), and
a distance between the first projection (see the drawing below) and the first fixed terminal (33, right) is smaller than a distance between the first base and the first fixed terminal (33, right). Since the structure of Yano is similar with the structure of the applicant’s invention, it would design the same structure.
[AltContent: textbox (2nd projection)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (1st projection)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (2nd base)][AltContent: arrow][AltContent: textbox (1st base)][AltContent: arrow]
PNG
media_image1.png
299
278
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Yano discloses:
an upper surface of the first base (see the drawing above) is inclined downward toward the right end of the movable contactor (48, see the drawing above).
Regarding claim 6, Yano discloses:
an upper surface of the first projection (see the drawing above) come into contact with the first fixed contact (33, right).
Regarding claim 7, Yano discloses:
a second magnet (36, left) facing the movable contactor (see the drawing above), wherein the second magnet (36, left) is provided on a left side of a left end of the movable contactor (48, see the drawing above), and
the second magnet (36, left) overlaps the movable contactor (48, see the drawing above) as viewed from left.
PNG
media_image3.png
302
482
media_image3.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 8, Yano discloses:
the first magnet (36, right) and the second magnet (36, left) are in a line, and identical poles of the first magnet (36, right) and the second magnet (36, left) face each other.
Regarding claim 9, Yano discloses:
a case (35) that covers the movable contactor (48, see the drawing above),
wherein in top view, a shortest distance between an inner surface of the case (35) and a right end surface of the movable contactor (48, see the drawing above) is shorter than a shortest distance between the inner surface of the case (35) and a side surface connecting the right end surface and a left end surface of the movable contactor (see the drawing above).
Since the structure of Yano is similar with the structure of the applicant’s invention, it would design the same structure.
Regarding claim 10, Yano discloses:
wherein the first fixed terminal (33, right) and the second fixed terminal (33, left) are inserted into the case (35), and
the case (35) is positioned between the first magnet (36, right) and the second magnet (36, left).
PNG
media_image4.png
312
461
media_image4.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 11, Yano discloses:
the movable contactor (48, 148, see the drawing above) further includes a second projection (see the drawing above), and
the second projection (see the drawing above) overlaps the second fixed contact (33, left) in top view.
Regarding claim 13, Yano discloses:
the movable contactor (48, 148, see the drawing below) further includes a third projection (148c, Figure 10) disposed in a line with the second projection (see the drawing above),
the third projection (148c) overlaps the second fixed (33, left) contact in top view, and the second fixed contact (33, left, see the drawing above) comes into contact with or is separated from both the second projection (see the drawing above) and the third projection (148c).
Regarding claim 17, Yano discloses:
the movable contactor (48, see the drawing above) further includes a second base (see the drawing above),
the second base (see the drawing above) is positioned on a left side of the second projection (see the drawing above),
a distance between the second projection (see the drawing above) and the second fixed terminal (33, left) is smaller than a distance between the second base (see the drawing above) and the second fixed terminal (33, left, and an upper surface of the second base (see the drawing above) is inclined downward toward a left end of the movable contactor (48, see the drawing above).
Since the structure of Yano is similar with the structure of the applicant’s invention, it would design the same structure.
Regarding claim 12, Yano discloses:
the movable contactor (48, see the drawing above) further includes a third projection (148c, Figure 10) disposed in a line with the second projection (see the drawing above)
the third projection (148c) overlaps the second fixed contact in top view, and the second fixed contact (see the drawing above) comes into contact with or is separated from the second projection (see the drawing above) or the third projection (148c).
PNG
media_image4.png
312
461
media_image4.png
Greyscale
PNG
media_image3.png
302
482
media_image3.png
Greyscale
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 14 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Yano et al. (US 2013/0057369).
Regarding claim 14, Yano teaches the claimed subject as disclosed above, however, fails to explicitly disclose the second projection and the third projection are positioned on an upper surface of the movable contactor, and are in a line in the movable contactor in a direction orthogonal to a direction in which a current flows.
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 third projection are positioned on an upper surface of the movable contactor for the purpose of suitability of the design choice, since it has been held that rearranging parts of an invention involves only routine skill in the art. In re Japikse, 86 USPQ 70.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 15 is objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
The prior art does not teach or suggest the relay comprising a shortest distance between the second projection and the third projection increases toward a left end of the movable contactor.
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
June 3rd, 2026
/SHAWKI S ISMAIL/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights