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.
Regarding claim 1, the claim requires the first barrel body to be “of an axial penetrating structure.” This is unclear as the barrel body is more tubular in shape and does not penetrate anything through the center axis? Appropriate correction is required.
Where applicant acts as his or her own lexicographer to specifically define a term of a claim contrary to its ordinary meaning, the written description must clearly redefine the claim term and set forth the uncommon definition so as to put one reasonably skilled in the art on notice that the applicant intended to so redefine that claim term. Process Control Corp. v. HydReclaim Corp., 190 F.3d 1350, 1357, 52 USPQ2d 1029, 1033 (Fed. Cir. 1999). The term “excircle” in claim 6 is used by the claim. The accepted meaning of excircle is “a circle that lies outside a triangle tangent to one of its sides.” The term is indefinite because the specification does not clearly redefine the term and that definition does not make sense in this application. Appropriate correction is required.
Claims 2-5 and 7-10 are rejected based on dependency.
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) 1-9 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Park (KR 102292681).
Regarding claim 1, Park shows a magnetic attraction structure for a toy, comprising a base (300), a shell (200), and a cover body (100) mounted between the base and the shell, a magnetic body (m) being connected in the cover body, wherein the shell is provided with a first barrel body (220) and a second barrel body (230), the first barrel body is located in the second barrel body, the first barrel body is of an axial penetrating structure and a slide opening (221) is formed in a side wall of the first barrel body, the second barrel body is connected in a groove (opening inside of 300) of the base through a buckling structure (figures 1-2 show 200 inside the 300, the buckling structure comprises a buckle body (360) and a connector (232) separately arranged between the second barrel body and the groove, and the buckle body is buckled in the connector; and the cover body is of a hollow structure opened in at least one end (110), a slide block (130) movably connected in the slide opening extends in a protruding manner on a side wall of the cover body, a gear ring (120) is arranged at an end wall of the cover body, and the gear ring is pushed by the magnetic body to be exposed out of the first barrel body (figure 1).
Regarding claim 2, the buckle body comprises a first buckle body (360) extending upward along a bottom wall of the groove, the connector comprises a first connector (232) formed, corresponding to the first buckle body, in a side wall of the second barrel body, and the first buckle body is extendable between the first barrel body and the second barrel body, so that the first buckle body is buckled in the first connector.
Regarding claim 3, the buckle body comprises a second buckle body (there are at least two buckle bodies 360 that connect to 232s) arranged on an outer side wall of the second barrel body, the connector comprises a second connector formed, corresponding to the second buckle body, in a side wall of the groove, and when the second barrel body is completely stored in the groove, the second buckle body is buckled in the second connector.
Regarding claim 4 the magnetic attraction structure for a toy according to claim 3, wherein the buckle body is provided with a protruding part extending in a protruding manner toward a direction of the connector, the protruding part is an arc-shaped body or a wedge-shaped body, and the protruding part is used to clamp and fix the buckle body in the connector (see wedged tip of 360 in figure 3).
Regarding claim 5, the first barrel body and the second barrel body are concentrically arranged on the shell, the first barrel body extends upward along a bottom wall of the second barrel body, and an axial height of the second barrel body is equal to a depth of the groove (figure 1).
Regarding claim 6, wherein a size of an inner cavity of the cover body is equal to or greater than an excircle diameter of the magnetic body, the cover body is further provided with a through hole (110) in a middle of the gear ring, and an opening size of the through hole is less than a size of the magnetic body (figure 1).
Regarding claim 7, the magnetic attraction structure for a toy according to claim 6, wherein an ejector block extends in a protruding manner (320) on an inner wall of the groove at a position facing the magnetic body, the ejector block abuts against the magnetic body, and a sum of heights of the ejector block and the magnetic body is less than a depth of the groove. From translation:” “Here, the support member 320 may have a substantially rectangular plate shape. The supporting member 320 may be disposed across a hole in the central portion of the open lower surface of the outer case 300 . At this time, the inner case 100 , the intermediate case 200 and the outer case 300 may block the open lower surface of the inner case 100 in the assembled magnet means (M). Accordingly, the magnet ma in the inner case 100 may be prevented from escaping by the support member 320”
Regarding claim 8, the magnetic attraction structure for a toy according to claim 1, wherein the base and the second barrel body are further connected through a positioning structure, the positioning structure comprises a positioning strip (350) and a positioning opening ( 231) separately arranged between the groove and the second barrel body, and the positioning strip and the positioning opening are adapted in shape and match with each other in an insertion connection manner.
Regarding claim 9, the magnetic attraction structure for a toy according to claim 1, wherein a limiting ring (310) circumferentially extends in a protruding manner on an outer side of an open end of the base.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
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 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) 10 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Park alone.
Park shows insertion opening (space between 330/340) for attaching to a toy but fails to show that the connection is on the second barrel body. Parks toy connection openings are on the outer base. It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art to move the toy connection openings (there is space between 330 and 340 that is open for connection when 330 and 340 are connected to a toy) from the base to the second barrel body since a mere rearrangement of parts is within the level of ordinary skill of a worker in the art. The toy connection means serve the same purpose and since the bottom is open could be on either the barrel or the base. Please note that “used to be fixedly connected to an insertion connection rod of an external toy…” is intended use.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KRISTINA ROSE FULTON whose telephone number is (571)272-7376. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 8-4pm.
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, Namrata Boveja can be reached at 571-272-8105. 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.
/KRISTINA R FULTON/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 3675
Prosecution Insights