DETAILED ACTION
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.
Claim(s) 1-5, 7, 8 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Reiter (US 10204747).
In re claim 1, Reiter, in figures 1-10, discloses an electromechanical switch comprising: a switch housing having a main body forming a chamber (as best seen in figure 6); fixed contacts coupled to the switch housing, each fixed contact having a mating end located in the chamber and a terminating end exterior of the switch housing (as best seen in figure 6), the fixed contact having a fixed mating surface (614,618) at the mating end of the corresponding fixed contact; a movable contact in the chamber and movable between an open position and a closed position, the movable contact including movable mating surfaces (616,620) configured to be coupled to the fixed mating surfaces at the mating ends of the fixed contacts in the closed position, the movable contact separated from the fixed contacts in the open position; and an actuator in the chamber, the actuator including an armature operably coupled to the movable contact to move the movable contact during operation of the actuator (as seen in figure 6 and other figures); wherein at least one of the fixed mating surfaces and the movable mating surfaces includes textured surface features such that mating interfaces between the fixed contacts and the movable contact each have numerous points of contact (multiple surfaces that meet this limitation are shown in figure 4).
In re claim 2, Reiter, in figures 1-10, discloses that the at least one of the fixed mating surfaces and the movable mating surfaces including the textured surface features is non-planar (the textured surfaces are non-planar as can be seen in the figures).
In re claim 3, Reiter, in figures 1-10, discloses that the textured surface features include knurls (knurled arrangement can be seen in figures 2 and 4-6).
In re claim 4, Reiter, in figures 1-10, discloses that the textured surface features include protrusions forming peaks defining the points of contact and grooves between the peaks (as best seen in figure 4).
In re claim 5, Reiter, in figures 1-10, discloses that the textured surface features are diamond shaped (this is best shown in figures 2 and 4).
In re claim 7, Reiter, in figures 1-10, discloses that the fixed contacts include the textured surface features and the movable contact is devoid of the textured surface features being planar at the movable mating surface (this configuration is shown in example 3 of figure 4).
In re claim 8, Reiter, in figures 1-10, discloses that the movable contact includes the textured surface features and the fixed contacts are devoid of the textured surface features being planar at the fixed mating surface (this is discussed in lines 50-55 of column 4).
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) 6 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reiter (US 10204747).
In re claim 6, Reiter teaches the claimed device except for the height value of the textured surface features. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the height value of the surface features be at least 100 microns, since it has been held that discovering an optimum value of a result effective variable involves only routine skill in the art. In re Boesch, 617 F.2d 272, 205 USPQ 215 (CCPA 1980). Please note that in the instant application, paragraph 22 applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations.
Claim(s) 9-20 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Reiter (US 10204747) in view of Ramezanian et al. (US 2011/0279202).
In re claim 9, Reiter teaches the claimed device except for the different hardness of the first and second material. Ramezanian however, in figures 1-22, discloses a similar device with fixed and moving contacts having different hardness (see paragraph 56). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the fixed and movable contacts of Reiter of different hardness as taught by Ramezanian to improve control of contact wear.
In re claim 14 and 20, Reiter, in figures 1-10, discloses an electromechanical switch comprising: a switch housing having a main body forming a chamber (as best seen in figure 6); fixed contacts coupled to the switch housing, each fixed contact having a mating end located in the chamber and a terminating end exterior of the switch housing(as best seen in figure 6), the fixed contact having a fixed mating surface (614,618) at the mating end of the corresponding fixed contact, the fixed contacts being manufactured from a first metal material having a first material hardness; a movable contact (616,620) in the chamber and movable between an open position and a closed position, the movable contact including movable mating surfaces configured to be coupled to the fixed mating surfaces at the mating ends of the fixed contacts in the closed position, the movable contact separated from the fixed contacts in the open position, the movable contact being manufactured from a second metal material; and an actuator in the chamber, the actuator including an armature operably coupled to the movable contact to move the movable contact during operation of the actuator (as seen in figure 6 and other figures); wherein at least one of the fixed mating surfaces and the movable mating surfaces includes textured surface features such that mating interfaces between the fixed contacts and the movable contact each have numerous points of contact (multiple surfaces that meet this limitation are shown in figure 4). Reiter does not disclose the different hardness of the first and second material. Ramezanian however, in figures 1-22, discloses a similar device with fixed and moving contacts having different hardness (see paragraph 56). Therefore it would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have made the fixed and movable contacts of Reiter of different hardness as taught by Ramezanian to improve control of contact wear.
In re claims 10-11, 15 and 16, Reiter/Ramezanian discloses different hardnesses but with the second material being harder than the first material (see paragraph 56), and with materials including copper for both fixed and movable contacts (see paragraphs 49 and 72-73). It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have reversed the positioning of the harder/softer material, since it has been held that a mere reversal of the essential working parts of a device involves only routine skill in the art. In re Einstein, 8 USPQ 167. Please note that in the instant application, paragraphs 24-25 applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed positioning of the harder and softer material on the fixed and movable contacts.
In re claims 12-13 and 17-18, Ramezanian discloses copper for first and second metal materials but does not disclose specific types of copper having different amounts of tempering. It would have been obvious to one having ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have chosen the claimed combination of copper materials for the first and second metal materials, since it has been held to be within the general skill of a worker in the art to select a known material on the basis of its suitability for the intended use as a matter of obvious design choice. In re Leshin, 125 USPQ 416. Please note that in the instant application, paragraph 25, applicant has not disclosed any criticality for the claimed limitations. In fact, the disclosure states that the materials may be any of the disclosed materials, thus, the specific type of copper does not appear to be important.
In re claim 19, Reiter, in figures 1-10, discloses that at least one of the fixed mating surfaces and the movable mating surfaces includes textured surface features such that mating interfaces between the fixed contacts and the movable contact each have numerous points of contact (multiple surfaces that meet this limitation are shown in figure 4).
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. A list of pertinent prior art is attached in form PTO-892.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Alexander Talpalatski whose telephone number is (571)270-3908. The examiner can normally be reached 10 AM - 6 PM PT.
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, Shawki Ismail can be reached at 5712723985. 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.
/Alexander Talpalatski/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2837
Prosecution Insights