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.
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 1-10 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 “A support frame…the support frame comprising”. Based on the preamble the focus of the invention appears to be solely on the support frame which is technically only one sub component of the overall knob assembly. However, the preamble further appears to introduce, via functional claiming, other elements of the knob assembly. The body of the later appears to positively link the support frame structure to again other elements of the knob assembly such as the knob ring, front panel, etc. This renders the overall scope of all the claims indefinite as it is not clear whether the intended scope is to be limited to the support frame or the entire knob assembly per se. In addition, it doesn’t make sense to state “the support frame comprising” and then include positively claimed limitations of elements outside the support frame such as the knob ring.
It is highly recommended to recite this as a combination, such as a knob assembly since it appears that the crux of the invention relies in part on structural relationships between the support frame and elements outside of it such as the knob ring and the front panel and knob ring encoder.
For purpose of examination, the claims were treated as being intended to claim the knob assembly, that is, the claim elements such as the knob ring, front panel, etc were treated as positively claimed and required. However, appropriate correction is required. It is further noted that if the scope of the claim substantially changes, it will affect patentability of the claim.
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) 1-6, 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102a1 as being anticipated by Moro et al. (USpgpub 20150153048).
Regarding claim 1, Moro et al. discloses a support frame (fig.26+; elements 40, 70 and 62 read on a support frame of the knob assembly generally seen in fig.26) configured to be coupled to a front panel (front panel 3) of an appliance and support a knob ring (22) installed to be exposed to an outside of the front panel (seen in fig.48), the support frame comprising:
a support (fig.28; 62 could be read on a support) that supports an actuating ring (fig.28; 65 could read on this) coupled to and rotated together with the knob ring (evident from figures);
a frame-side coupler (fig.28, 61 reads on this coupler) installed with elastic members or springs (fig.28, 60) to return the knob ring to its initial position; and
a space (interior space of the frame that allows for encoder 25a’ and magnet 64) for installing a knob ring encoder that senses rotation of the knob ring.
Regarding claim 2, Moro et al. discloses the support frame of claim 1, wherein the support frame is coupled at aligned positions on the front panel (evident from fig.34 and fig.48; the support frame would be coupled to the front panel and aligned therewith, the fastener holes are readily seen in these figures).
Regarding claim 3, Moro et al. discloses the support frame of claim 2, wherein the support frame is disposed inside of the front panel (based on the interpretation made above at least a part of the support frame is disposed inside the front panel; note the claim does not state the entirety needs to be inside the panel).
Regarding claim 4, Moro et al. discloses the support frame of claim 1, wherein the support includes a through-hole (the hole through which either shaft 70 or 51’ would be inserted reads on this) that forms a path for a coupling shaft of the actuating ring to pass through the support frame and the support corresponding to an outer diameter of the actuating ring (seen in figures since the actuating ring surrounds this).
Regarding claim 5, Moro et al. discloses the support frame of claim 4, wherein the through-hole is formed in a cylindrical shape (as seen in fig.37 the through hole has a general cylindrical shape).
Regarding claim 6, Moro et al. discloses the support frame of claim 1, wherein the frame-side coupler comprises protrusion (seen in fig.41; coupler 61 has protrusions on each side that seat the elastic springs 60) to which a first end of the elastic members or the springs is fixed, the second end of the elastic members or the springs being connected to the actuating ring (seen in fig.41).
Regarding claim 10, Moro et al. discloses the support frame of claim 1, wherein the space for installing the knob ring encoder is disposed around the support (the space is disposed around the support, generally on an inside thereof or adjacent; the claim does not qualify the phrase around the support. This limitation is further not novel as it is common place to have encoders in various positions, this is also seen in the first embodiment in Moro) so that the knob ring encoder detects the rotation of the actuating ring, thereby detecting the rotation of the knob ring.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 7-9 are 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.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to THOMAS C DIAZ whose telephone number is (571)270-5461. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 9am-6pm.
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, John Olszewski can be reached at 571-272-2706. 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.
/THOMAS C DIAZ/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3617