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 Interpretation
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(f):
(f) Element in Claim for a Combination. – An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The following is a quotation of pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.
The claims in this application are given their broadest reasonable interpretation using the plain meaning of the claim language in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The broadest reasonable interpretation of a claim element (also commonly referred to as a claim limitation) is limited by the description in the specification when 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is invoked.
As explained in MPEP § 2181, subsection I, claim limitations that meet the following three-prong test will be interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph:
(A) the claim limitation uses the term “means” or “step” or a term used as a substitute for “means” that is a generic placeholder (also called a nonce term or a non-structural term having no specific structural meaning) for performing the claimed function;
(B) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is modified by functional language, typically, but not always linked by the transition word “for” (e.g., “means for”) or another linking word or phrase, such as “configured to” or “so that”; and
(C) the term “means” or “step” or the generic placeholder is not modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for performing the claimed function.
Use of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim with functional language creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites sufficient structure, material, or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Absence of the word “means” (or “step”) in a claim creates a rebuttable presumption that the claim limitation is not to be treated in accordance with 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph. The presumption that the claim limitation is not interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, is rebutted when the claim limitation recites function without reciting sufficient structure, material or acts to entirely perform the recited function.
Claim limitations in this application that use the word “means” (or “step”) are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action. Conversely, claim limitations in this application that do not use the word “means” (or “step”) are not being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, except as otherwise indicated in an Office action.
This application includes one or more claim limitations that do not use the word “means,” but are nonetheless being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, because the claim limitation(s) uses a generic placeholder that is coupled with functional language without reciting sufficient structure to perform the recited function and the generic placeholder is not preceded by a structural modifier.
In claims 1 and 11, the “energy accumulator” is a spring (pg. 6, line 19 of the specification).
Because this/these claim limitation(s) is/are being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, it/they is/are being interpreted to cover the corresponding structure described in the specification as performing the claimed function, and equivalents thereof.
If applicant does not intend to have this/these limitation(s) interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph, applicant may: (1) amend the claim limitation(s) to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph (e.g., by reciting sufficient structure to perform the claimed function); or (2) present a sufficient showing that the claim limitation(s) recite(s) sufficient structure to perform the claimed function so as to avoid it/them being interpreted under 35 U.S.C. 112(f) or pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, sixth paragraph.
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 1-11, 13, and 15-20 are 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.
Claim 1 recites “part of the periphery” in line 5. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. The limitation has been read as -part of a first periphery-.
Claim 2 recites “a periphery” in line 3. Whether this recitation refers to a new structure or the earlier recited structure is unclear. The limitation has been read as -the first periphery-.
Claim 2 recites “the periphery” in line 6. This limitation appears to refer to a different periphery than that recited previously, because this periphery does not have toothing. The limitation has been read as -a second periphery-.
Claim 13 recites “the main wheel” in line 3. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. The limitation has been read as -a main wheel-.
Claim 15 recites “the drive of the cam is an instantaneous drive” in line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. The limitation has been read as -a drive of the cam is instantaneous-.
Claim 18 recites “the action” on line 2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation. The limitation has been read as -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.
Claims 1, 3-12, 14, 16, and 19-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Nakao (US 4261047).
Regarding claim 1, Nakao teaches (Fig. 1) a timepiece drive device (title) comprising: an input mobile (4) which includes a first toothing (Fig. 1); a main wheel (7) which includes a second toothing (7a) only over part of a first periphery of the main wheel (Fig. 1), the second toothing being in meshing engagement with the first toothing (col. 2:21-24), a cam (6a) which is connected (via 1c) to the main wheel (Fig. 1) and has a cam profile, a cam follower (5a) which interacts with the profile, and an energy accumulator (5b) which elastically returns the cam follower against the profile of the cam (col. 2:17-20). After the flat surface of 6a and 5a interact at the dotted outline of 5a seen in Fig. 1, the elasticity of 5b allows 5a to return to its original position to bear against the curved profile of 6a.
Regarding claims 3 and 19, Nakao teaches (Fig. 1) the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the timepiece drive device, cam, first toothing, and second toothing are arranged so as to arm the energy accumulator (5b) via the cam follower (5a) substantially permanently, except for driving phases in which the cam (6a) is driven by the energy accumulator via the cam follower. See col. 2:15-20: when then flat surface of 6a is rotated to face 5a, a clearance is created, such that teeth of 3 pushing on elastic 5b causes 5 to rotate so that 5a engages 6a. Otherwise, the energy accumulator is always tensioned against teeth 3.
Regarding claim 4, Nakao teaches (Fig. 1) the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the drive device is arranged so that: the cam (flat surface of 6a) is driving by an action of the energy accumulator (5b) via the cam follower (5a) over a first angular extent, and the cam (curved surface of 6a) supplies energy to the energy accumulator (5b) via the cam follower (5a) over a second angular extent which complements the first angular extent. The dotted line position of 5 in Fig. 1 corresponds to the first angular extent wherein 5b, pushed by 3, rotates 5 so that 5a engages the flat surface of 6a. The original, solid line positions of 5 in Fig. 1 correspond to the second angular extent when the curved surface of 6a engages 5a such that 5b is compressed by 3 to lock rotation of 5.
Regarding claim 5, Nakao teaches (Fig. 1) the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the timepiece drive device is arranged so that a mechanical power supplied to the energy accumulator (5b) is constant or substantially constant throughout a period of time or substantially throughout a period of time during which the cam (6a) is not driven by the energy accumulator via the cam follower (5a). The curved surface of 6a is a partial circle (Fig. 1), so accumulator 5b is therefore displaced by a constant distance (due to the constant radius), making the mechanical power (i.e., spring potential energy) supplied to the energy accumulator constant while the curved surface of 6a engages 5a.
Regarding claim 6, Nakao teaches the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the cam follower comprises a lever (5a in Fig. 1, with fulcrum 5c).
Regarding claim 7, Nakao teaches the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the energy accumulator comprises a spring (col. 2:14-15).
Regarding claim 8, Nakao teaches (Fig. 1) the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the cam (6a) is kinematically connected (Fig. 1 and col. 1:59-60) to a drive element (6) for driving a display element (2) for displaying time-based information (title, abstract).
Regarding claim 9, Nakao teaches (Fig. 1) a timepiece calendar (abstract) comprising: the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 1, and a display element (2) for displaying time-based information, the display element including a toothing (2a).
Regarding claim 10, Nakao teaches a timepiece movement (col. 1:61) comprising the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 1 (col. 1:50-53).
Regarding claim 11, Nakao teaches a timepiece (abstract: “watch”) comprising the timepiece movement as claimed in claim 10.
Regarding claim 12, Nakao teaches (Fig. 1) a method for operating a timepiece drive device, the timepiece drive device comprising: a cam (6a), a cam follower (5a), and an energy accumulator (5b) which returns the cam follower against the cam (col. 2:17-20: after the flat surface of 6a and 5a interact at the dotted outline of 5a seen in Fig. 1, the elasticity of 5b allows 5a to return to its original position to bear against the curved profile of 6a), the method comprising arming the energy accumulator via the cam follower substantially permanently, except for driving phases in which the cam is driven by the energy accumulator via the cam follower. See col. 2:15-20: when then flat surface of 6a is rotated to face 5a, a clearance is created, such that teeth of 3 pushing on elastic 5b causes 5 to rotate so that 5a engages 6a.
Regarding claim 14, Nakao teaches (Fig. 1) the method as claimed in claim 12, comprising at least one iteration of the following: bringing a first toothing (of 3) and a second toothing (see image below) into meshing engagement so as to drive the cam (6a) for arming the energy accumulator (when the first and second toothing are in contact, the curved surface of 6a abuts against 5a to compress 5b against 4), and then bringing the first toothing and the second toothing out of meshing engagement (dotted line of 5b) and driving the cam (flat surface of 6a) by the energy accumulator via the cam follower (5a). When the flat surface of 6a faces 5a, the first toothing pushes on the second toothing of 5b to rotate element 5 counter-clockwise so that 5b moves 5a to rotate the cam. See col. 2:17-21 and 2:23-27).
PNG
media_image1.png
392
448
media_image1.png
Greyscale
Regarding claim 16, Nakao teaches the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 1, which is a device for displaying time-based or time-derived information (abstract, title).
Regarding claim 20, Nakao teaches (Fig. 1) the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 1, wherein the profile of the cam (6a) is arranged so that a mechanical power supplied to the energy accumulator (5b) is constant or substantially constant throughout a period of time or substantially throughout a period of time during which the cam (6a) is not driven by the energy accumulator via the cam follower (5a). The curved surface of 6a is a partial circle (Fig. 1), so accumulator 5b is therefore compressed by a constant distance (due to the constant radius), making the mechanical power (i.e., spring potential energy) supplied to the energy accumulator constant while the curved surface of 6a engages 5a.
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 13, 15, and 17 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Nakao in view of Villar (US 20130250737).
Regarding claim 13, Nakao discloses the method as claimed in claim 12.
Nakao is silent regarding a duration of the arming corresponding to at least 90% of a time of a period of rotation of the main wheel of the timepiece drive device.
Nakao’s timepiece drive device drives a calendar of a watch to change the date (abstract).
Villar teaches an armed energy accumulator ([0037]: “date jumper spring 82”), a main wheel ([0052]), a timepiece drive device ([0046]: “drive wheel set 7”), and release of the armed energy accumulator occurring instantaneously at midnight ([0053]). Therefore, a duration of the arming of the energy accumulator is at least 90% of the rotation of the main wheel (midnight is 1 minute / 1440 minutes of the main wheel’s 24-hour period of rotation, so the energy accumulator is armed 1339 minutes / 1440 minutes > 90% of 24-hours).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nakao’s duration to correspond to at least 90% of a time of a period of rotation of the main wheel, as suggested by Villar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that Nakao’s date change occurs quickly, so that a user can quickly read and determine what the date is in case they forget.
Regarding claim 15, Nakao discloses the method as claimed in claim 12.
Nakao is silent regarding the driving phases of the cam being instantaneous driving phases.
Villar teaches instantaneous driving phases of a cam. The cam is driven to drive the date disc ([0045]), which effects an instantaneous jump ([0053]). Because the cam’s driving phase takes part in an instantaneous jump, the cam’s driving phase is considered an instantaneous driving phase.
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nakao’s cam driving phase to be instantaneous, as suggested by Villar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that Nakao’s date change occurs quickly, so that a user can quickly read and determine what the date is in case they forget.
Regarding claim 17, Nakao discloses the timepiece drive device as claimed in claim 16, which is adapted for a calendar system (abstract).
Nakao is silent regarding calendar system being instantaneous-jump system.
Villar teaches an instantaneous-jump calendar system ([0053]).
It would have been obvious for one of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to have modified Nakao’s calendar system to be an instantaneous-jump system, as suggested by Villar. One of ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to make this modification so that Nakao’s date change occurs quickly, so that a user can quickly read and determine what the date is in case they forget.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 2 and 18 would be allowable if rewritten to overcome the rejection(s) under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), 2nd paragraph, set forth in this Office action and to include 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: regarding claim 2, the prior art does not show or suggest an angular extent of a first periphery of a main wheel which comprises a second toothing being equal or substantially equal to an angular travel covered by a cam when the cam is not driven by an energy accumulator via a cam follower, and/or an angular extent of a second periphery of the main wheel without toothing is equal or substantially equal to an angular travel covered by the cam when the cam is driven by the energy accumulator via the cam follower, and/or a timepiece drive device is arranged so that an action of the cam follower on the cam causes the main wheel rotate independently of the input mobile, in combination with the other limitations.
Regarding claim 18, the prior art does not show or suggest a cam, first toothing, and second toothing arranged so that action of a cam follower on the cam causes a main wheel to rotate independently of an input mobile, in combination with the other limtiations.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure. Chaignat (US 20100002544) discloses a wheel including a toothing only over part of a periphery of the wheel (Fig. 4).
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to Matthew Hwang whose telephone number is (571)272-1191. The examiner can normally be reached M-F from 9:30-5:30 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, Renee Luebke can be reached at (571)272-2009. 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.
/MATTHEW DANIEL HWANG/Examiner, Art Unit 2831
