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 § 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.
Claims 1-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
Independent claims 1 and 14 have each been newly amended to recite “maintained in a concealed state” and “transition from the concealed state to an exposed state” which is unclear as to how the concealed state can be both “maintained” and also transitioned from. The examiner suggests overcoming this rejection by replacing the structural permanence implying/comprising limitation “maintained” with capability language such as --positionable-- that would not imply or comprise permanence. The examiner notes that such an amendment would not detract from the allowability noted in the “Allowable Subject Matter” section elsewhere below.
The remaining claims depend from the above and are thus similarly unclear/rejected.
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.
(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 1-3, 14, and 16-18 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) and/or (a)(2) as being anticipated by Chen US6760569.
Claim 1 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejection). A steering wheel-mounted button module, comprising: a case (21) mounted on a steering wheel body (4); a retractable unit (221, 244) installed inside the case and configured to move forward and backward; and a button unit (3) rotatably installed on the retractable unit and maintained in a concealed state (fig.7) in which the button unit is positioned inside the case, having a rear end (32) elastically supported (via 222) to rotate away from the retractable unit and comprising at least one button (33), wherein forward movement of the retractable unit out of the case causes the button unit to rotate toward a front side of the steering wheel body (front of 4) and transition from the concealed state to an exposed state (fig.6, wherein the 3 is closer to 4 in fig.6 than it is in fig.7).
Claim 2. The steering wheel-mounted button module of claim 1, wherein the case is provided with guide slots (slot between 22 and left boss of 21 receiving left 2213; slot between 22 and right boss of 21 receiving right 2213) formed on inner sides thereof into which guide protrusions (left and right 2213) protruding on sides of the retractable unit are inserted and guided.
Claim 3. The steering wheel-mounted button module of claim 1, wherein the case is mounted on an upper surface of the steering wheel body (see fig.5 and note that mounting surface of 4 to 3 is “upper” relative to the bottom of 4).
Claim 14 (as best understood, see 35 USC 112 rejection). A steering wheel-mounted button module comprising: a case (21) mounted on a steering wheel body (4); a retractable unit (221, 224) installed inside the case and configured to move forward and backward; a button unit (3) rotatably installed on the retractable unit and maintained in a concealed state (fig.7) in which the button unit is positioned inside the case, the button unit having a rear end (32) elastically (via 222) supported to rotate away from the retractable unit and comprising a button (33); and a drive unit (222) installed on the case to provide power to move the retractable unit, wherein forward movement of the retractable unit out of the case causes the button unit to rotate toward a front of the steering wheel body (front of 4) and transition from the concealed state to an exposed state (fig.6, wherein the 3 is closer to 4 in fig.6 than it is in fig.7).
Claim 16. The steering wheel-mounted button module of claim 14, wherein the drive unit is installed on one side of the case (side of 21 on which 222 is installed).
Claim 17. The steering wheel-mounted button module of claim 14, wherein the case comprises guide slots (slot between 22 and left boss of 21 receiving left 2213; slot between 22 and right boss of 21 receiving right 2213) formed on inner sides thereof into which guide protrusions (left and right 2213) protruding on sides of the retractable unit are inserted and guided.
Claim 18. The steering wheel-mounted button module of claim 14, wherein the case is mounted on an upper surface of the steering wheel body (see fig.5 and note that mounting surface of 4 to 3 is “upper” relative to the bottom of 4).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 4-13 and 15 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejections under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) set forth in this Office action and to include all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The art of record does not suggest the totality of limitations in any of the above claims (to include all base and intervening claims), does not provide any teaching, suggestion or motivation to modify toward the entirety of applicant's claims, nor was there any readily apparent cogent reasoning that is unequivocally independent of hindsight that would have led one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was made to modify the prior art to obtain the entirety of applicant’s claimed invention.
Response to Arguments
Applicant argues that the newly added claim 1 and claim 14 limitations overcome the prior art rejections. This is not persuasive. The prior art anticipates the newly added limitations present new 35 USC 112 clarity issues and are suggested by the art as is detailed in the reworded rejections elsewhere above. Note that applicant’s limitations “forward movement” and “front” are recited without reference frame such that they broadly encompass numerous possible directions. For example, the steering wheel side facing the front of the vehicle could read on the claims just as the opposite side of the steering wheel facing the driver could. Accordingly, the direction limitations, as claimed, are very broad. Furthermore, even if the claims were amended to specify that front/forward were to face a driver of the vehicle, note that figure 7 shows element 221 to at some small angle to the left of vertical such that the initial rotation of 221 toward vertical would incur some motion toward the driver (i.e., the vertical position of 221 would be closer to the driver than the position of 221 shown in figure 7). Note also that element 224 rotates ever closure to the driver during its full rotation from its figure 7 to figure 6.
Conclusion
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new grounds 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 extension fee 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 date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to VICTOR L MACARTHUR whose telephone number is (571)272-7085.
Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for published applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Patent Center for authorized users only. Should you have questions about access to Patent Center, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free).
/VICTOR L MACARTHUR/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3618