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
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
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) 1-2 and 4 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20160040450 to Shiu.
Regarding claim 1, Shiu discloses:
A clutch ring structure (fig 2), comprising: a ring body (150) comprising a first surface (153) and a second surface (151) opposite to each other along an axis (axis seen in fig 2); at least one clutch protrusion (top and bottom protrusions next to 153c seen in fig 7) extending outward from the first surface along the axis; and at least one mounting member (151c/d) extending outward from the second surface along the axis; wherein, when a force parallel to the axis is exerted onto the at least one clutch protrusion, the at least one clutch protrusion is pushed by the force to allow the ring body to be deflected (when 140 is turned, 141 pushes and deflects 150 via 153d and the clutch protrusions).
Regarding claim 2, Shiu discloses:
The clutch ring structure of claim 1, wherein a number of the at least one clutch protrusion is two (fig 2), a number of the at least one mounting member is two (fig 2), the ring body comprises two curved segments (153 and 151 are curved segments), each of the two mounting members comprises two connecting arms (arm portion of the protrusions) and a restricting portion (153d), the two connecting arms of each of the mounting members are connecting between the two curved segments (via the curve of 153), the restricting portion of each of the mounting members is connected between the two connecting arms (fig 7), and an angle is contained between each of the connecting arms and the second surface (fig 2).
Regarding claim 4, Shiu discloses:
The clutch ring structure of claim 1, wherein the at least one clutch protrusion and the at least one mounting member are arranged alternatively and equidistantly (fig 2).
Response to Arguments
Applicant's arguments filed 06/12/2026 have been fully considered but they are not persuasive. Regarding Applicant’s arguments that 153 and 151 cannot be considered a first and second surface of 150 since they are rotate independently, Examiner respectfully disagrees. 150 is the return mechanism composed of 151 and 153 on either side, with each being the first and second surface. Nothing in the claims recites both surfaces not rotating with respect to each other.
Regarding Applicant’s arguments that 151/153 does not get deflected via 140, Examiner respectfully disagrees. Deflection does not mean an axial movement of 150 caused by 140, nor do the claims recite an axial deflection. 140 deflects 153 by rotating it. Therefore, rejection is maintained.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 5-20 are allowed.
Claim 3 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.
REASONS FOR INDICATING ALLOWABILITY
The following is an examiner’s statement of reasons for allowance: The prior art does not teach or fairly suggest the clutch mechanism as claimed in the independent claims 5 and 10.
Regarding claims 5 and 10, the prior art of record, including the combination of Shiu (US 20160040450), and Varadaraju et al. (US 20220081932) discloses a clutch mechanism relevant to the claimed invention, but fails to teach each and every limitation of the claims. Specifically, regarding claims 5 and 10, the prior art fails to teach a clutch mechanism comprising wherein the at least one mounting member is mounted at one of the annular surface and the gear surface, at least one transmission protrusion protrudes from another one of the annular surface and the gear surface and faces toward the at least one clutch protrusion, the transmission shaft is rotated from an initial position to a first positioning position, the at least one clutch protrusion is pushed by the at least one transmission protrusion to allow the ring body to be deflected, and the at least one clutch protrusion moves from a first side of the at least one transmission protrusion to a second side of the at least one transmission protrusion. One of ordinary skill in the art would not find it obvious to modify the clutch mechanism of the prior art to be structured and to function as claimed in the instant application without the use of impermissible hindsight and/or destroying the references. Therefore, the prior art of record does not disclose the clutch mechanism of claims 5 and 10.
Any comments considered necessary by applicant must be submitted no later than the payment of the issue fee and, to avoid processing delays, should preferably accompany the issue fee. Such submissions should be clearly labeled “Comments on Statement of Reasons for Allowance.”
Conclusion
THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. 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 Yahya Sidky whose telephone number is (571)272-6237. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Thursday 8:30-4:30.
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, Christine Mills can be reached at (571) 272-8322. 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.
/Y.S./Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
/CHRISTINE M MILLS/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights