DETAILED ACTION
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 4, 5, and 12 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 4, it is unclear what is meant by “the counter-shape comprises at least two distinct portions arranged to allow discrete fixing adjustment according to at least two distinct relative orientations”. After reviewing the current disclosure, it unclear what element constitute “two distinct portions” of the counter-shape. Clarification is required.
Regarding claims 5 and 12, it is unclear if the features following “for example” are positively claimed. To provide the broadest reasonable interpretation, the “for example” features were treated as mere functional language. Clarification is required.
Regarding 12, it is unclear what defines “means for reversible fixing”. The current disclosure does appear to specify the structure associated with the claimed “means for reversible fixing”.
35 USC § 112, 6th Paragraph (Analysis of Means language)
Claim 12 includes "means-plus-function" recitations that presume to invoke 35 USC § 112, 6th paragraph because the claims meet the following 3-prong analysis:
(A) the claim limitations must use the phrase "means for" or "step for;"
(B) the "means for" or "step for" must be modified by functional language; and
(C) the phrase "means for" or "step for" must not be modified by sufficient structure, material, or acts for achieving the specified function (see MPEP 2181; see also In re Donaldson).
The “means for reversible fixing” of claim 12 meets the 3-prong analysis and 112, 6th paragraph is invoked.
Regarding claims 6, 7, 8, and 13, it is noted that the “orientation means” and “sandwich means” do not appear to invoke 112, sixth paragraph because they include sufficient structure, material or acts for achieving the specified function.
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 1-8 and 12-14 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by EP 2133757B1 to Eberwein.
Regarding claim 1, Eberwein discloses device for testing a watch member, comprising at least:
a holding device (e.g., see at least Figs. 10 and 11 that show brackets holding a roller, wherein the brackets and one roller equate to a holder), arranged to receive and hold in place the watch member;
a fixing device (e.g., see Figs. 1 and 2 that show a sphere that supports a watch therein), arranged to fix the holding device on a testing machine (e.g., see paragraph 39, water mover 1), characterized in that one of the holding device and of the fixing device comprises a counter-shape at least partially matching the other of the holding device and of the fixing device (e.g., see Fig. 10 and 11 that show a counter shape on rollers 40, 41; see also paragraph 51 that discloses the roller shape), and in that the counter-shape is arranged to allow an adjustment to fix the holding device according to at least seven distinct relative orientations between the holding device and the fixing device (e.g., see at least Figs 1, 2, 10, and 11 that shows the fixing device can be oriented in any orientation due to the spherical shape and no orientation limitations);
[claim 2] wherein the counter-shape comprises at least one continuous portion of contact between the holding device and the fixing device and arranged to allow a continuous variation of the fixing adjustment between at least two distinct and orthogonal relative orientations between the holding device and the fixing device (e.g., see at least Figs. 10 and 11 that show rollers 40 and 41 are shaped to allow a continuous variation of the fixing adjustment between the holding device and the fixing device);
[claim 3] wherein said at least one continuous portion comprises a continuous surface of contact between the holding device and the fixing device of curved (e.g., see at least Figs. 10 and 11 that show rollers 40, 41 with a curved surface), and/or ovoid, and/or spherical shape;
[claim 4] wherein the counter-shape comprises at least two distinct portions arranged to allow discrete fixing adjustment according to at least two distinct relative orientations, for example according to orthogonal directions, between the holding device and the fixing device curved (e.g., see at least Figs. 10 and 11 that show two rollers 40, 41 with a curved surface);
[claim 5] wherein the fixing device comprises at least one aperture, and/or wherein the holding device fixed by the fixing device comprises at least one portion directly accessible from the outside (e.g., see Figs. 1, 2, 10, and 11 that shows the fixing device is accessible from the outside), for example to receive a shock directly on the holding device;
[claim 6] comprising an orientation adjustment device with orientation drive means arranged to move the holding device relative to the fixing device (e.g., see paragraph 10 to discusses a drive mechanism);
[claim 7] wherein the orientation drive means:
comprise a docking portion arranged to couple reversibly relative to the holding device, and/or
comprise at least one roller for driving the holding device (e.g., see at least Figs. 10 and 11 that show rollers 40 and 41), and/or at least one track for driving the holding device, and/or at least one arm for driving the holding device;
[claim 8] wherein the orientation drive means:
comprise a portion passing through the aperture; and/or
are arranged to come into contact with said at least one portion of the holding device directly accessible from the outside (e.g., see paragraph 10 that discusses a drive mechanism);
[claim 12, as best understood] wherein the fixing device comprises means for reversible fixing on the testing machine (e.g., see at least Figs 10 and 11 that show two rollers, 40 and 41, which equate, as best understood, fixing the holder to the machine);
[claim 13, as best understood] wherein the holding device comprises:
two half-shells arranged to be fixed together and arranged to contain the watch member (e.g., see at least Figs. 1, 2, 10, and 11 and paragraph 40 that disclose “housing 2 consists of two spherical hollow shells 10, 11), and/or
at least one measurement sensor such as an inclinometer, an accelerometer, an image sensor, a force sensor, and/or
an external casing with a contact surface for the fixing device that is substantially continuous, and/or curved, and/or ovoid, and/or spherical, and/or
a positioning device for positioning and/or holding the watch member on the holding device, for example by tightening or sandwiching means for identifying a position of the watch member in the holding device; and
[claim 14] comprising the watch member, formed by a watch movement, or a watch head, or a wristwatch (e.g., see at least Fig. 2 that shows a watch 9; see also paragraph 39).
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 15 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Eberwein in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2021/0223739 to Briscombe.
Regarding claim 15, Eberwein discloses all of the recited features but is silent regarding the machine performing a shock test, and/or a linear acceleration test, and/or a vibration test, and/or an angular acceleration test.
In the same field of endeavor, Briscombe teaches a machine for testing a watch that includes a vibration test (e.g., see at least paragraph 21 that discusses a “vibration sensor may be configured to detect the vibrations cause as result of internal events with the automatic watch…the vibration sensor may be located on the watch holder”)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the current invention to modify Eberwein with a vibration sensor as taught by Briscombe in order to use a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or products) in the same way. In this case, using a vibration sensor to sense vibrations may help with preventing damage to the watch’s internal mechanism (e.g., see Briscombe at paragraph 59).
Allowable Subject Matter
Claims 9-11 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.
Claim 9 recites “fixing device comprises:- at least one cradle arranged to receive the holding device,- at least one clamping member movable between an opening position in which the holding device can be freely received or removed from the cradle, and a clamping position in which the holding device is clamped on the cradle, and wherein said at least one clamping member is arranged to be able to occupy an adjustment position arranged between the clamping position and the opening position, and in which a relative orientation between the holding device and the fixing device can be adjusted.” Eberwein does not disclose this feature. During the Examiner’s search, no other prior art was discovered that disclosed these features. For at least this reason, claims 9-11 would be allowed if rewritten in independent form.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2019/0171167 to Stranczl discusses a dynamic chronometric testing of a movement of a watch (e.g., see Fig. 1)
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2018/0181075 to Born discusses a smart watch winding device (e.g., see at least Fig. 1)
U.S. Patent No. 9,292,000 to Lamarche discusses a multifunctional case for winding a watch (e.g., see at least Fig. 2)
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2009/0189049 to Chang discusses a rotary display stand (e.g., see Fig. 1)
U.S. Patent No. 7,530,733 to Louie discusses a watch-wind apparatus with an embodiment that includes wobbling movement (e.g., see Figs. 23, 24, and 25)
U.S. Patent No. 2,917,955 to Leger discusses a testing device for self-winding mechanisms (e.g., see Figs. 1-3)
WO 2014/037294A1 to Dottling discusses a watch winder with gyroscope rings (e.g., see at least Fig. 3)
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to JAMES S MCCLELLAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7167. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday (8:30AM-5:00PM).
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, Kang Hu can be reached at 571-270-1344. 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.
/James S. McClellan/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 3715
Prosecution Insights